1. Field of the Invention
The present invention relates generally to devices for the fixation and support of bone bodies. In particular, the present invention relates to an implant device, such as an interbody fusion device, having subsidence control.
2. Background of the Invention
Bone mechanical properties greatly influence the stiffness of vertebra-implant-vertebra constructs. Bone properties are a function of many factors including bone mineral density, age, and sex. For comparative purposes, it will be assumed that bone properties are constant in the following discussions. Preparation of the bone to receive the implant can influence strength and stiffness. Again, for comparative purposes, it will be assumed that bone preparation is not a variable except when specifically discussed.
Interbody devices are typically classified as threaded cylinders or screws (e.g., BAK C), boxes (usually tapered rectangular boxes with ridges like the Brantigan cage), or vertical cylinders (e.g., Harms cage). Threaded cylinders usually have small pores and graft material is located inside the hollow interior of the cylinder. Device stiffness might be an issue for such designs. Boxes and vertical cylinders are generally open structures and in these devices a combination of device stiffness and subsidence are responsible for loading the graft.
The stiffness of a material and the stiffness of the structure (device) are often confused. Material stiffness is quantified by Modulus of Elasticity, the slope of the stress-strain curve. Steel has a high modulus, and gold has a low modulus. Structural or device stiffness is a function of dimensions of the part and the material from which the part is made. For example, steel is a very stiff material. However, when formed into the shape of a structure like a paperclip it is easily bent. Stiffness of an assembly or construct can be influenced by connections. While a paperclip and even a piece of paper are strong in tension, when assembled with a piece of paper a paperclip can be easily pulled off because they are only held together by friction.
The same analogy holds for inter-vertebral implants. For instance, consider a simplified construct consisting of a bone block, an interbody device, and a bone block, stacked on top of each other and loaded in compression. If the device is made from a low modulus material but has a large footprint on the bone, and conforms very well to the bone, the assembly can be very stiff in compression. The slope of the load-deflection curve would be steep. A device made from a high modulus material that has a small footprint on the bone and sharp edges might simply punch into the bone under compressive load. The slope of the load-deflection curve would be low, making the construct appear very compliant despite the fact that the device is rigid.
Finally, the terms flexibility and stiffness are used in connection with both the range of motion of the spine and the mechanical performance of implant constructs, and the distinction is not always clearly defined.